A tale of two lame duck(wignall)

[Pepsi]

Writing on the wall for the PNP

Mark Wignall
Thursday, August 30, 2007



If there is one common ground in the research findings from the plethora of pollsters on the scene now, it is the one which speaks to the steady decline of the personal popularity of the prime minister since the slide began in the latter part of last year, and also her ratings relative to those of the Opposition leader Bruce Golding.

Now, hold that thought, that understanding, and let us try to weave our way through what happened recently in the voting of security personnel and election-day workers and what appeared to be an unusually high voter turnout. First, election-day workers, especially those allied to the two main political parties, tend to vote in higher turnouts than the general population forming the electorate. On the other hand, the security forces tend to vote in numbers similar to the general population.

Reports of the security forces vote, certainly in the Kingston Metropolitan area and St Catherine, are pointing to numbers in the low 80 per cent! The conventional wisdom honed during the time of the PNP's long stay at the bat was that the days of high turnout such as the 89 per cent registered in 1980 were over. That said, it is usually thought that whenever a government is about to be booted out of office, the voter turnout tends to peak significantly higher than normal.

As example, when Hurricane Gilbert ran a straight path of destruction across the island in September 1988, it not only blew off too many of the roofs of our houses, but it figuratively blew the JLP out of office. The voter turnout in February 1989 when the PNP was first elected was 79 per cent, a high turnout.

But what was the experience in between? In 1993, 67 per cent turnout; in 1997, 65 per cent; in 2002, 60 per cent, and all turnouts showing a steady decline. With an apparent surge of voting intention as indicated by the high turnout of the security forces, what is that telling us as to what we should expect next Monday?

Remember now, pollsters have all been showing a decline in the personal popularity of "Portia", the name and the face which the PNP has branded as its calling card, placing "PNP" as a kind of inglorious afterthought. But even in the days when her popularity was miles ahead, constituency polling was indicating that its effectiveness was not bringing about the desired "results" for the PNP.

Now, if the popularity of the prime minister has been on the decline, and in the midst of that close to a very important election there seems to be a surge of voting intention, does it not seem obvious that that increase ought to mean that it is the Opposition party which is gaining?

On the other hand, is it likely that the PNP has been able to snatch back something in the generally quick response to the hurricane damage and the somewhat smooth return to normality? I think that that is not on, and voters have already made up their minds in the general direction of the vote, and now in the numbers who will do so.

The very fact that the PNP was able to engineer so quickly the "hand-out" cheques tells me that that party's back is against the wall. And then of course when I saw the prime minister personally handing out cheques, I spelt in that PNP defeat and panic.

But quite apart from that, there are realities which pollsters can never factor in, notwithstanding the empiricism involved. The first factor is the terrible fallout in the PNP with Portia being a gang of one with the remainder of the party on the other side. Fact is, Jamaicans owe these "patriots", that is Peter Phillips, Maxine Henry-Wilson and others who stood up for principle over party; in that effort to accept the date recommended by the Electoral Commission they were able to pull back a part of the legacy of Norman Manley.

Many in the PNP are aware of the "wrath" which would fall on them in the event of a PNP victory. It is similar to the "wrath" which was promised to the comrades in South-East St Ann, should the PNP lose there.

As I understand it, the plan, in the unlikely event of a PNP win, is to recommend to the GG someone other than Portia Simpson Miller, a person who has demonstrated that the job of prime minister does not bring out the very best in her. The more painless route is any plan which would guarantee a PNP loss.

Another reality is the organisational readiness of the JLP over the PNP. The JLP has pulled out all stops to win this one. The visible side of this is the ad campaign, relentless, sharp and miles ahead of the PNP's. One which is not so visible is the election-day readiness which will make their efforts in the North-East St Ann by-election in 2001 look like child's play.

Division in the PNP cannot be hidden anymore, and people on the street have begun to recognise it and will probably act on it. We have seen how the prime minister withdraws from the public whenever it seems that there is a squabble in the party. And then of course she appears in public to hand out cheques, a job more suited for a civil-service functionary.
If the JLP can get out the youth vote, which I believe it will, and significant numbers of the disgruntled in the 2002 uncommitted along with first-time voters, it will win big and we will see no close elections.

The more important fact is that the JLP and Bruce Golding have been running a near perfect campaign, while Portia who has co-opted the lock, stock and barrel of the PNP, has tripped up every step of the way. Failing to appreciate that where PJ Patterson forced the PNP into a structure-strong party, the PNP was able to survive and win even with the failings of its leader; with her trying to change that back to a leader-strong party, she carries the PNP down every time she falters.

Just ask KD Knight.
Come next Monday I expect that voters will end the long and too chequered run of the PNP and replace it with the JLP and Bruce Golding as prime minister.

In 1999 I asked Bruce Golding if he was afraid of becoming prime minister. He said no. Well the responsibilities which will descend on him in the days, months and years after will answer that question in a much more telling way.
Once again, welcome to a new history, Bruce Golding.

observemark@gmail.

[Pepsi]

part 2

No place for favouritism in hurricane mop-up

Dennis Morrison
Wednesday, August 29, 2007



Up to the middle of last week I was, like many others, waiting for the return of electricity and water at home, but thankful at the same time to have been spared the worst effects of Hurricane Dean. But by the start of this week, the majority of customers of JPSCo and NWC had their services restored because of the extraordinary efforts of the workers of these two organisations. Nonetheless, many Jamaicans, especially the poor in the most affected areas in St Thomas, the Corporate Area, St Catherine, Clarendon, Manchester and St Elizabeth, are still hurting.

The resolve of citizens to help themselves quickly in cleaning up and undertaking repairs was a most encouraging sign soon after the hurricane passed. I guess this was because so many of us were relieved by the hurricane's late shift in direction that there was no time for moping. Of course, the fact that telephone communication remained possible both internally and with the outside world would have helped to buoy the spirits.

At the time of writing, 78 per cent of JPSCo's customers are receiving service which has greatly reduced the number of those who have to cope with the inconvenience of dark nights and the sense of insecurity that this brings. The JPSCo has, however, advised that severe damage has been done to its power delivery system, especially the transmission network "which has sustained significantly more damage than it did during hurricane Ivan in 2004". Its facilities in parts of St Catherine, Clarendon, Manchester and St Elizabeth are said to be the most badly hit.

With respect to water supply, the NWC had restored over 50 per cent of its production capacity by Thursday morning, three days after the passing of Hurricane Dean, and this moved to 85 per cent by the start of this week. A lesser percentage than this of its customers is receiving service because of technical issues relating to turbidity and water-treatment systems. But most important is that the functioning of the water supply system is tied to the availability of electricity and hence, NWC customers in Clarendon, Manchester and St Elizabeth would still be most affected.

In the environment of disruption of basic services, it was surprising to hear the pre-eminence of election talk from some quarters even just a few hours after the hurricane. This was coming from people who evidently had suffered little or no loss and were experiencing no discomfort, hence their insensitivity to the dislocation suffered by hundreds of thousands of fellow citizens. Some political campaigners also seemed oblivious to the devastation suffered by some people. How else could they have been so preoccupied with the election date? To have even entertained the thought that elections could be run on August 27, as originally set, suggests a high degree of contempt and lack of feeling for those whose lives had been disrupted.

Certainly, in the first few hours, no one knew how bad the damage was, much less to be able to judge how quickly basic services could be restored. Not even the managers of the utility services or the emergency management agency had by then been able to cover enough areas of the country in order to be able to assess the scale of the disaster. Most surprising also was the controversy about the State of Public Emergency. I had thought that after Hurricane Ivan when the issue came up and was dealt with convincingly that there would have been a better understanding of the rationale for this action.

Instead, we were again second-guessing the head of government who in situations like what occurred two Sundays ago must act decisively to protect the most vulnerable among us. They, after all, have no security-guard service, electronic gates, and standby generators to run power supply. To feign political motives for this action is ludicrous, especially when the extreme ideological divide no longer exists.

The prime minister's action was, however, appreciated by people who felt exposed and, in particular, the poorer people in the Corporate Area who had to face darkness without the privilege of security guards, and by people in parts of rural Jamaica who felt the brunt of the destructive winds of Hurricane Dean. Her concern for the protection of the vulnerable has always been a strong point recognised by the Jamaican population and when tested this quality was clearly evident. She is one of a growing number of female heads of government who are demonstrating the capacity of women to provide judicious leadership when the going gets tough. This is why we heard from her about relief and recovery efforts first and not about elections.

Attention must now turn to the acceleration of the recovery programme and to those areas of the productive sectors that have been affected. People who have lost their roofs will need assistance quickly as we will soon enter the rainy season. Those who are employed and are NHT contributors will have a less difficult time. There are those, however, who will be dependent on the state and relief agencies to come to their rescue. The process of assessment is well under way and the response must be efficient.

The agricultural sector is the most crucial area of production that must be given priority. The southern parishes that have been worst hit happen also to be the largest contributors to domestic food supplies. The speed with which they are assisted to replant will determine the impact on food prices and the economy of rural districts and villages. The rural poor were already the group with the highest percentage of people living below the poverty line. If they are not helped speedily we will see a serious deterioration in their situation.

Based on what has been said about the arrangements made with distributors for basic food supply for the hurricane season, it should not be difficult to arrange immediate relief to the most serious cases of need. One would expect that lessons have been learnt from previous disasters about how to minimise abuse of the distribution system. It is essential that the benefits go to those for whom they are intended. There is no place for favouritism of any kind, particularly at a time of national distress.


Talk